Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster
Yıl 2019, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 12, 1182 - 1200, 29.10.2019

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Aksoy, I. (2013). Francis Bacon on the question of knowledge. (Doctoral dissertation, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi).
  • Alakwe, K. O. (2017). Positivism and Knowledge Inquiry: From Scientific Method to Media and Communication Research. Science Arena Publications Specialty Journal of Humanities and Cultural Science. Vol, 2 (3): 38-46.
  • Aliyu, A. A., & Bello, M. U., & Kasim, R., & Martin, D. (2014). Positivist and non-positivist paradigm in social science research: Conflicting paradigms or perfect partners. J. Mgmt. & Sustainability, 4, 79.
  • Arslan, İ. (2014). Bilim Felsefesine Mekanistik Bir Yaklaşım: William Bechtel. Dîvân: Disiplinlerarası Çalışmalar Dergisi, (36), 365-370.
  • Bayhan, V. (2016). Sosyal Bilimlerde “Objektiflik” Efsanesi. Mukaddime. 7(2).
  • Blumberg, A. E., & Feigl, H. (1931). Logical positivism. The Journal of Philosophy, 28(11), 281-296.
  • Casadevall, A., & Fang, F. C. (2010). Reproducible science. Infection and immunity, 78(12), 4972–4975. doi:10.1128/IAI.00908-10
  • Chisholm, R. M. (1941). Sextus empiricus and modern empiricism. Philosophy of Science, 8(3), 371-384.
  • Christakis, D.A., & Zimmerman, F.J. (2013). Rethinking reanalysis. JAMA. 310:2499–500
  • Collins, H. M. (1975). The seven sexes: A study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics. Sociology, 9(2):205-224.
  • Comte, A. (2015). Pozitif Felsefe Dersleri ve Pozitif Anlayış Üzerine Konuşma. (Çev.Erkan Ataçay). Bilgesu Yayıncılık. Ankara
  • Comte, A. (1858). The Catechism of Positive Religion. Savill and Edwards Printers. London
  • Çalık, D. & Çınar, Ö. P. (2009). Geçmişten günümüze bilgi yaklaşımları bilgi toplumu ve internet. XIV. Türkiye'de İnternet Konferansı, 12-13.
  • Floyd, J. (2005). Putnam’s ‘The Meaning of Meaning’: Externalism in Historical context. Hilary Putnam, 17-52.
  • Freese, J., & Peterson, D. (2017). Replication in social science. Annual Review of Sociology, 43, 147-165.
  • Galison, P. (1990). Aufbau/Bauhaus: Logical positivism and architectural modernism. Critical Inquiry, 16(4), 709-752.
  • Gimbel, E. W. (2016). Interpretation and Objectivity: A Gadamerian Reevaluation of Max Weber’s Social Science. Political Research Quarterly, 69(1), 72-82.
  • Gouldner, A. (1968): The sociologist as partisan: Sociology and the welfare state. American Sociologist 3(2), 103–116.
  • Hage, G. (2011). Social gravity: Pierre Bourdieu’s phenomenological social physics. Force, Movement, Intensity: The Newtonian Imagination in the Social Sciences, 80-92.
  • Hick, J. (1960). Theology and verification. Theology Today, 17(1), 12-31.
  • Khanna, P. (2018) Positivism and Realism. In: Liamputtong P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Springer, Singapore
  • Kline, R.B. (2004). Beyond Significance Testing: Reforming Data Analysis Methods in Behavioral Research, Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
  • Kurtyılmaz, D. (2018). Pozitivizmin Doğrulama ve Yanlışlama İlkeleri Ekseninde Modern Bilimin Bilgiyi Metafizikten Arındırma İdeali. BEÜ İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(1), 15-33.
  • Leedy, P. D. (1980). Practical Research: Planning and Design. Second Ed. New York. Macmillan Publishing Co.,
  • Macfarlane, B., & Cheng, M. (2008). Communism, universalism and disinterestedness: Re-examining contemporary support among academics for Merton’s scientific norms. Journal of Academic Ethics, 6(1), 67-78.
  • Makel, M. C., & Plucker, J. A. (2014). Facts are more important than novelty: Replication in the education sciences. Educational Researcher, 43(6), 304-316.
  • Matusov, E. (1996). Replicability in Research: The Crisis of Positivist Ideology in the Social Sciences. Theory & Psychology, 6(3), 545-547.
  • Miller, K. I. (2000). Common ground from the post-positivist perspective. Perspectives on Organizational Communication: Finding Common Ground, SR Corman and MS Poole (eds.), The Guilford Press, New York, 46-67.
  • National Research Council. (2002). Scientific Research in Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10236.
  • Naylor, T. H., & Finger, J. M. (1967). Verification of computer simulation models. Management science, 14(2), B-92.
  • Ozansoy, C. (1998). Bilimde Değer Sorunu ve Pozitivizm İlişkisi Üzerine Bazi Gözlemler. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 47(1), 37-48.
  • Passmore, J. A. (1943). Logical positivism (I). The Australasian Journal of Psychology and Philosophy, 21(2-3), 65-92.
  • Peng, R. D. (2011). Reproducible research in computational science. Science, 334(6060), 1226-1227.
  • Pierre, E. A. (2012). Another postmodern report on knowledge: Positivism and its others. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 15(4), 483-503.
  • Popper, K. R. (1963). Science as falsification. Conjectures and refutations, 1, 33-39.
  • Pridemore, W. A. & Makel, M. C., & Plucker, J. A. (2018). Replication in criminology and the social sciences. Annual Review of Criminology, 1, 19-38.
  • Pusztai, L., & Hatzis, C., & Andre, F. (2013). Reproducibility of research and preclinical validation: problems and solutions. Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology, 10(12), 720.
  • Putnam, H. (1991). The “corroboration” of theories. The philosophy of science, 121-137.
  • Reedy, W. J. (1994). The historical imaginary of social science in post-Revolutionary France: Bonald, Saint-Simon, Comte. History of the Human Sciences, 7(1), 1-26.
  • Reinhart, M. (2016). Reproducibility in the Social Sciences. Reproducibility: Principles, Problems, Practices, and Prospects, 407–423.doi:10.1002/9781118865064.ch19
  • Riedl, R. (2007). On the replication of positivist case study research. ECIS 2007 Proceedings. 70. Erişim: 10.07.2019. url: https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2007/70/?utm_source =aisel.aisnet.org%2Fecis2007%2F70&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages
  • Ron, W. (2004). The Rhetoric of Positivism Versus Interpretivism. MIS quarterly, 28(1).
  • Schlick, M. (1936). Meaning and verification. The philosophical review, 45(4), 339-369.
  • Schmaus, W. (1982). A Reappraisal of Comte's Three-State Law. History and Theory, 21(2), 248-266.
  • Schmidt, S. (2009). Shall we really do it again? The powerful concept of replication is neglected in the social sciences. Review of General Psychology, 13(2), 90-100.
  • Sritanayarat, D., & Kanjanajuta, C., & Tanawattanakorn, C. (2010). Positivism: To see, to hear, to taste, to smell and to touch, but not to feel. Human Resource and Organization Development Journal, 2(2), 27-34.
  • Taş, K. (2011). Anthony Giddens' ın Sosyal Teorisi Ve Metodolojisi Üzerine/An Assessment on Anthony Giddens's Social Theory and His Methodolog. Hikmet Yurdu Düşünce-Yorum Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 4(8), 11-24.
  • Tepe, H. (1999). Viyana çevresi filozoflarında doğrulama ve/veya onaylama. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(2).
  • Yanık, A. (2008). Akademik Görüş: Pozitivist Modern Bilimsel Yaklaşımın Eleştirisi. Seyahat ve Otel İşletmeciliği Dergisi, 7(3), 79-82.

Bilimsel Tekrarlanabilirlik İlkesi Kapsamında Pozitivist Metodolojinin Evrensel Yasalara Ulaşma İdeali

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 12, 1182 - 1200, 29.10.2019

Öz

Pozitivizm, bir epistemolojik ve metodolojik yöntem olarak,
kurumsallaşmasını 18’nci yüzyıl Aydınlanma Çağı sonrası tamamlamış, modern
bilim olarak tanımlanan faaliyeti belirtmektedir. Auguste Comte’un pozitivizm
tasarıma göre bilimin özünü, tekilliklerdeki düzenliliklerin tetkiki ve bu
benzerliklerin sistematik zirvesini temsil eden evrensel yasalara ulaşma gayesi
oluşturmaktadır. Mantıksal pozitivist ekole göre ise tekrarlanabilirlik,
müteakip çalışmaların ancak kendisinden önce geleni doğruladığı hallerde
geçerli olabilmekte ve ancak mütemadiyen doğrulanan bilgi evrensel nitelik
taşıyabilmektedir. Pozitivizme göre bilimsel güvenilirlik ve meşruiyet için
araştırmanın tekrarlanabilmesi elzemdir, çünkü diğer araştırmacılar
araştırmanın bulgularını tekrarlanabilirlik ilkesi sayesinde test edebilmekte
ve bilimi bilim olmayan, sahte bilim veya metafizikten ayırabilmektedir.
Tekrarlanabilirlik, birbirinden bağımsız araştırmacıların aynı sonuçlara
ulaşması idealini taşıdığı üzere, kişisel ön yargıları, duyguları ve yanlış
inançları ortadan kaldırarak doğal dünya hakkındaki gerçekleri ortaya çıkardığı
iddiasını taşımakta ve bu bağlamda bilimsel nesnellik (objektiflik) ilkesi ile
de birbirini tamamlayan bir rolü oynamaktadır. Bu çalışmada 19’ncu yüzyılda
kurgulanan ve hala geçerliliğini koruyan pozitivist metodolojinin, hakikat ile
doğrudan bağı olduğunu iddia ettiği evrensel yasaların, tümevarımcı model ile temsil
eden tekrarlanabilir bilgi üzerinden inşa edilişi verilmektedir. Araştırma, birinci
ve ikinci el kaynaklara dayanan, teorik (kuramsal) bir araştırmadır.

Kaynakça

  • Aksoy, I. (2013). Francis Bacon on the question of knowledge. (Doctoral dissertation, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi).
  • Alakwe, K. O. (2017). Positivism and Knowledge Inquiry: From Scientific Method to Media and Communication Research. Science Arena Publications Specialty Journal of Humanities and Cultural Science. Vol, 2 (3): 38-46.
  • Aliyu, A. A., & Bello, M. U., & Kasim, R., & Martin, D. (2014). Positivist and non-positivist paradigm in social science research: Conflicting paradigms or perfect partners. J. Mgmt. & Sustainability, 4, 79.
  • Arslan, İ. (2014). Bilim Felsefesine Mekanistik Bir Yaklaşım: William Bechtel. Dîvân: Disiplinlerarası Çalışmalar Dergisi, (36), 365-370.
  • Bayhan, V. (2016). Sosyal Bilimlerde “Objektiflik” Efsanesi. Mukaddime. 7(2).
  • Blumberg, A. E., & Feigl, H. (1931). Logical positivism. The Journal of Philosophy, 28(11), 281-296.
  • Casadevall, A., & Fang, F. C. (2010). Reproducible science. Infection and immunity, 78(12), 4972–4975. doi:10.1128/IAI.00908-10
  • Chisholm, R. M. (1941). Sextus empiricus and modern empiricism. Philosophy of Science, 8(3), 371-384.
  • Christakis, D.A., & Zimmerman, F.J. (2013). Rethinking reanalysis. JAMA. 310:2499–500
  • Collins, H. M. (1975). The seven sexes: A study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics. Sociology, 9(2):205-224.
  • Comte, A. (2015). Pozitif Felsefe Dersleri ve Pozitif Anlayış Üzerine Konuşma. (Çev.Erkan Ataçay). Bilgesu Yayıncılık. Ankara
  • Comte, A. (1858). The Catechism of Positive Religion. Savill and Edwards Printers. London
  • Çalık, D. & Çınar, Ö. P. (2009). Geçmişten günümüze bilgi yaklaşımları bilgi toplumu ve internet. XIV. Türkiye'de İnternet Konferansı, 12-13.
  • Floyd, J. (2005). Putnam’s ‘The Meaning of Meaning’: Externalism in Historical context. Hilary Putnam, 17-52.
  • Freese, J., & Peterson, D. (2017). Replication in social science. Annual Review of Sociology, 43, 147-165.
  • Galison, P. (1990). Aufbau/Bauhaus: Logical positivism and architectural modernism. Critical Inquiry, 16(4), 709-752.
  • Gimbel, E. W. (2016). Interpretation and Objectivity: A Gadamerian Reevaluation of Max Weber’s Social Science. Political Research Quarterly, 69(1), 72-82.
  • Gouldner, A. (1968): The sociologist as partisan: Sociology and the welfare state. American Sociologist 3(2), 103–116.
  • Hage, G. (2011). Social gravity: Pierre Bourdieu’s phenomenological social physics. Force, Movement, Intensity: The Newtonian Imagination in the Social Sciences, 80-92.
  • Hick, J. (1960). Theology and verification. Theology Today, 17(1), 12-31.
  • Khanna, P. (2018) Positivism and Realism. In: Liamputtong P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Springer, Singapore
  • Kline, R.B. (2004). Beyond Significance Testing: Reforming Data Analysis Methods in Behavioral Research, Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
  • Kurtyılmaz, D. (2018). Pozitivizmin Doğrulama ve Yanlışlama İlkeleri Ekseninde Modern Bilimin Bilgiyi Metafizikten Arındırma İdeali. BEÜ İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(1), 15-33.
  • Leedy, P. D. (1980). Practical Research: Planning and Design. Second Ed. New York. Macmillan Publishing Co.,
  • Macfarlane, B., & Cheng, M. (2008). Communism, universalism and disinterestedness: Re-examining contemporary support among academics for Merton’s scientific norms. Journal of Academic Ethics, 6(1), 67-78.
  • Makel, M. C., & Plucker, J. A. (2014). Facts are more important than novelty: Replication in the education sciences. Educational Researcher, 43(6), 304-316.
  • Matusov, E. (1996). Replicability in Research: The Crisis of Positivist Ideology in the Social Sciences. Theory & Psychology, 6(3), 545-547.
  • Miller, K. I. (2000). Common ground from the post-positivist perspective. Perspectives on Organizational Communication: Finding Common Ground, SR Corman and MS Poole (eds.), The Guilford Press, New York, 46-67.
  • National Research Council. (2002). Scientific Research in Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10236.
  • Naylor, T. H., & Finger, J. M. (1967). Verification of computer simulation models. Management science, 14(2), B-92.
  • Ozansoy, C. (1998). Bilimde Değer Sorunu ve Pozitivizm İlişkisi Üzerine Bazi Gözlemler. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 47(1), 37-48.
  • Passmore, J. A. (1943). Logical positivism (I). The Australasian Journal of Psychology and Philosophy, 21(2-3), 65-92.
  • Peng, R. D. (2011). Reproducible research in computational science. Science, 334(6060), 1226-1227.
  • Pierre, E. A. (2012). Another postmodern report on knowledge: Positivism and its others. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 15(4), 483-503.
  • Popper, K. R. (1963). Science as falsification. Conjectures and refutations, 1, 33-39.
  • Pridemore, W. A. & Makel, M. C., & Plucker, J. A. (2018). Replication in criminology and the social sciences. Annual Review of Criminology, 1, 19-38.
  • Pusztai, L., & Hatzis, C., & Andre, F. (2013). Reproducibility of research and preclinical validation: problems and solutions. Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology, 10(12), 720.
  • Putnam, H. (1991). The “corroboration” of theories. The philosophy of science, 121-137.
  • Reedy, W. J. (1994). The historical imaginary of social science in post-Revolutionary France: Bonald, Saint-Simon, Comte. History of the Human Sciences, 7(1), 1-26.
  • Reinhart, M. (2016). Reproducibility in the Social Sciences. Reproducibility: Principles, Problems, Practices, and Prospects, 407–423.doi:10.1002/9781118865064.ch19
  • Riedl, R. (2007). On the replication of positivist case study research. ECIS 2007 Proceedings. 70. Erişim: 10.07.2019. url: https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2007/70/?utm_source =aisel.aisnet.org%2Fecis2007%2F70&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages
  • Ron, W. (2004). The Rhetoric of Positivism Versus Interpretivism. MIS quarterly, 28(1).
  • Schlick, M. (1936). Meaning and verification. The philosophical review, 45(4), 339-369.
  • Schmaus, W. (1982). A Reappraisal of Comte's Three-State Law. History and Theory, 21(2), 248-266.
  • Schmidt, S. (2009). Shall we really do it again? The powerful concept of replication is neglected in the social sciences. Review of General Psychology, 13(2), 90-100.
  • Sritanayarat, D., & Kanjanajuta, C., & Tanawattanakorn, C. (2010). Positivism: To see, to hear, to taste, to smell and to touch, but not to feel. Human Resource and Organization Development Journal, 2(2), 27-34.
  • Taş, K. (2011). Anthony Giddens' ın Sosyal Teorisi Ve Metodolojisi Üzerine/An Assessment on Anthony Giddens's Social Theory and His Methodolog. Hikmet Yurdu Düşünce-Yorum Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 4(8), 11-24.
  • Tepe, H. (1999). Viyana çevresi filozoflarında doğrulama ve/veya onaylama. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(2).
  • Yanık, A. (2008). Akademik Görüş: Pozitivist Modern Bilimsel Yaklaşımın Eleştirisi. Seyahat ve Otel İşletmeciliği Dergisi, 7(3), 79-82.
Toplam 49 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Uğur Berk Kalelioğlu 0000-0001-5127-8756

Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Ekim 2019
Gönderilme Tarihi 24 Ekim 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019 Cilt: 5 Sayı: 12

Kaynak Göster

APA Kalelioğlu, U. B. (2019). Bilimsel Tekrarlanabilirlik İlkesi Kapsamında Pozitivist Metodolojinin Evrensel Yasalara Ulaşma İdeali. Uluslararası Beşeri Bilimler Ve Eğitim Dergisi, 5(12), 1182-1200.

Uluslararası Beşeri Bilimler ve Eğitim Dergisi 

Bu eser Creative Commons Alıntı-Gayri Ticari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) ile lisanslanmıştır.